posted at 5:03 pm on March 31, 2011 by Allahpundit

If you thought “protecting civilians” was merely UN-speak for “aiding the rebels” (as many of the rebels did), think again. Not only are NATO leaders refusing to arm them, but the fact that they think violence against defenseless people by their putative ally is so likely that deterring it requires a formal warning backed by a threat of bombardment tells you a lot about how suspicious the coalition is of its new best friends. Good thing the CIA vetting process is ongoing; hopefully we’ll find out whether they’re good guys or bad guys before they’re installed in power.

Every news report on Libya these days asks, “Who are the rebels?” An equally important question: Who are the “civilians”?

“We’ve been conveying a message to the rebels that we will be compelled to defend civilians, whether pro-Qaddafi or pro-opposition,” said a senior Obama administration official. “We are working very hard behind the scenes with the rebels so we don’t confront a situation where we face a decision to strike the rebels to defend civilians.”…

“This is a challenge,” said a senior alliance military officer. “The problem of discriminating between combatant and civilian is never easy, and it is compounded when you have Libyan regime forces fighting irregular forces, like the rebel militias, in urban areas populated by civilians.”…

Noncombatants and the various shades of opposition, resistance and rebellion “are so intermixed that it is not feasible to discern where the boundary between the civilians and opposition forces lie,” the official said. “There are also those civilians entitled to protection that may be armed in order to protect their families, homes, businesses, and communities. Other civilians may join the rebels at certain stages, becoming armed combatants, and then decide to return home for whatever reason, thus transitioning back to civilian non-combatants.”

Qaddafi’s been sending weapons to regime devotees in his hometown of Sirte to defend the city if/when the rebel assault ever comes, so the already murky definition of “civilian” is about to get murkier still. But would the rebels really attack honest-to-goodness civilians for allying themselves with Qaddafi, even if they were unarmed? Spiegel thinks they already are:

Six weeks after the revolution began, Benghazi, capital of free Libya, is descending into mistrust and fear. More stores have closed and most people no longer dare to give out their phone numbers. No one wants to say anything anymore beyond the revolution’s set phrases — nothing against the rebels and nothing against the government in Tripoli. One of many rumors says Gadhafi has spies within the National Council — why else would it be the youth who are now being cut down?…

No one dares to go out at night, as rounds of machine gun fire thunder through the empty streets. National Council members are no longer seen in public and they’re hard to reach for interviews. “There are death squads on both sides,” says Nasser Buisier, who fled to the US when he was 17, but has returned for the revolution. Buisier’s father is a former information minister, but was also a critic of Gadhafi, and his son doesn’t have much that’s positive to say about the new leadership. “Most of them never had to make sacrifices, they were part of the regime and I don’t believe they want elections,” Buisier says. He believes the National Council is on the verge of collapse and once that happens, he’d rather not be in Benghazi.

Buisier is heading back to the US, but is reluctant to say precisely when. He’s afraid he’s been blacklisted. He recently attended four funerals in a single day, for both rebels and regime supporters. Benghazi’s central hospital admits five, sometimes 10, patients each day with gunshot wounds. Two pick-up trucks outfitted with machine guns guard the hospital entrance and photos of missing people adorn the walls.

It is said that 8,000 people in Benghazi were government spies — the rebels found their names in files kept by the secret police. Armed young men roam the streets at night, arresting regime supporters, but private acts of revenge take place as well.

Follow the link for more, including a report that rebels are rounding up black Africans from the sub-Saharan part of the continent on suspicion that they’re mercenaries for Qaddafi. Some are, but others are simply migrant workers; regardless, they’re being beaten and imprisoned or worse. Marco Rubio’s showing a lot of guts in defying popular doubts about the mission and backing Obama on it, but if Spiegel’s right about the National Council evaporating, his call for Congress to recognize them as the true government of Libya will haunt him. For everyone’s sake, I hope they pull it together. Soon.

Mohammed Ismail, a senior aide to Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam, visited London in recent days, British government sources familiar with the meeting have confirmed.

The contacts with Ismail are believed to have been one of a number between Libyan officials and the west in the last fortnight, amid signs that the regime may be looking for an exit strategy…

“The message that was delivered to him is that Gaddafi has to go and that there will be accountability for crimes committed at the international criminal court,” a Foreign Office spokesman told the Guardian , declining to elaborate on what else may have been discussed.

Some aides working for Gaddafi’s sons, however, have made it clear that it may be necessary to sideline their father and explore exit strategies to prevent the country descending into anarchy.

The sooner he’s gone, the better, but read the Spiegel piece anyway if you skipped it. Whoever or whatever follows Qaddafi into power, the recriminations between the two sides will be vicious. Sirte, as ground zero for regime loyalists, will be in the crosshairs, with a real risk of a humanitarian crisis developing there in the aftermath. What’s NATO’s move then?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

As the fortunes of Colonel Gaddafi’s forces and the Libyan rebels continue to see-saw, many commentators are calling for the West to arm the opposition forces. Yet the disclosure on Tuesday that US intelligence agencies have picked up “flickers” of an al-Qaeda presence among the rebels has set off a fierce debate within the Obama administration – and the wider coalition – about whether giving them weapons may inadvertently help the enemies of the West.

Part of the problem, according to a senior US intelligence official, is that the American government is largely flying blind when it comes to the exact make-up of rebel forces. So how legitimate are the worries about
al-Qaeda opportunistically inserting itself into the civil war?

After a quick glance at the headlines and blog posts on HA the last couple of days, I think I can safely cancel my paid subscription to the Economist. Now if I could only find a fun site with an even mix of politics, pop culture, and international affairs…

Is the Harvard debating club running this show? There is no difference between a civilian and a soldier in conflicts like this. If you back the rebels you are a target and if you back the government you are also a target.

Now this is the kind of war limited scope limited time kinetic military action the leftards can support. There are no good guys or bad guys. It is all relative. There is no clear objective, thus no possibility of failure.

Its’ like those little league games where they don’t keep score and at the end of the season every kid gets a trophy. There are no winners, but more importantly there are no losers.

Marco Rubio’s showing a lot of guts in defying popular doubts about the mission and backing Obama on it.

Rubio’s a fool for sticking his neck out when he’s not required to. Another reason we shouldn’t elect young inexperienced senators to the presidency just because they’re pretty. I hope Qaddafi wins without killing a single American or NATO person. Then Obama can truly own a clusterfark of his own making.

Let’s see. Qaddaffi’s forces, leery of driving tanks under the nose of NATO air power, have shifted to civilian vehicles. The rebels, with limited resources, are using civilian vehicles. The civilians, for obvious reasons, are using civilian vehicles.

Senior Libyan rebel “officers” sold Hizballah and Hamas thousands of chemical shells from the stocks of mustard and nerve gas that fell into rebel hands when they overran Muammar Qaddafi’s military facilities in and around Benghazi, debkafile’s exclusive military and intelligence sources report.
Word of the capture touched off a scramble in Tehran and among the terrorist groups it sponsors to get hold of their first unconventional weapons.

According to our sources, the rebels offloaded at least 2,000 artillery shells carrying mustard gas and 1,200 nerve gas shells for cash payment amounting to several million dollars.

US and Israeli intelligence agencies have tracked the WMD consignments from eastern Libya as far as Sudan in convoys secured by Iranian agents and Hizballah and Hamas guards. They are not believed to have reached their destinations in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, apparently waiting for an opportunity to get their deadly freights through without the US or Israel attacking and destroying them.
(More………….)

“Most of them are professionals, lawyers, doctors, people who appear to be credible,”

Mark Steyn, filling in for Rush, just destroyed this concept today. Assad of Syria is an opthamologist. Che Guevara was served as a doctor. Fidel Castro was a lawyer. One of the Al Qaeda planners was an engineer. The Times Square bomber was a financial expert. And Maj. Hassan of the Ft. Hood shootings was, of course, a doctor.

Profession does not equal legitimacy. Anyone who thinks that professions are genetic markers indicating legitimacy or wisdom should not be entrusted with the governance of America.

Our mission at this point should be to kill or capture Qadaffi and get out. There is a civil war brewing there and we have no clue who the good guys are. Let them sort it out. We should be providing humanitarian assistance if things get really ugly there and that’s about it IMO.

NATO is doing what the U.N. resolution authorized them to do. The resolution did not authorize arming the rebels which is a good thing since we don’t know anything about them. To hear McCain and Graham pontificate on how we should immediately arm the rebels (whoever they are) is disturbing to say the least.

Marco Rubio’s showing a lot of guts in defying popular doubts about the mission and backing Obama on it.

Yet another stupid chickenhawk neocon. And not even a Natural Born American either. He ran away when Jan Brewer and Arizona needed him too when under assault from his dear friend Herr Obama. Bravely ran away.

Since the “rebels” are already killing civilians, as are we with our bombing which can never be perfect, we may end up obliterating both sides, and God knows who else, in order to make sure we “save and protect” the Libyan people.

Sadly, I hate to say Rubio is making his first freshman mistake – one that will most likely disqualify him from here forward. I know I am disenchanted and disappointed with this current Rubio view. To cast any lot with Obama is premature and a large mistake.

“The message that was delivered to him is that Gaddafi has to go and that there will be accountability for crimes committed at the international criminal court,”

Or, if he’d prefer, Qadaffi can relax at a remote villa in Uganda, throwing million-dollar parties for his closest friends. If he wants, he can even use the WH planning office, since they seem to have similar booking tastes.

I have a bad feeling about this. Obama desperately needs a “win” in this, and would do anything to get it. He’s taking a beating in the court of public opinion. I’m just afraid of what he will do, and what it will cost us.

Sirte, as ground zero for regime loyalists, will be in the crosshairs, with a real risk of a humanitarian crisis developing there in the aftermath. What’s NATO’s move then?

Humanitarian is apparently the magic word. Not sure if blue helmeted U.N. peacekeepers, from Africa, without ammo for their weapons will be a match for thousands of Libyan tribesmen with plenty of ammo and unfulfilled blood lust.

I have a bad feeling about this. Obama desperately needs a “win” in this, and would do anything to get it. He’s taking a beating in the court of public opinion. I’m just afraid of what he will do, and what it will cost us.

sandee on March 31, 2011 at 5:32 PM

Funny thing is: Despite everything else he has done wrong, Obama could come out tomorrow and say “You know what, we’re going to open ANWR to drilling”. Not only would his popularity shoot up immediately but he would neutralize some of the threat to his reelection. The fact that he will never do this shows where his bread is buttered. Soros wouldn’t be able to make billions more from Petrobras, would bankroll Obamas primary challenger, and even if he didn’t, the billion Obama plans to raise for 2012 would turn into a couple hundred mil.

Something interesting in happening in Africa right now. Obama is losing black Africans. many africans hate what he is doing in Libya, and the rebels are especially evil.

They are rounding up blacks who live in Libya and executing them, claiming they are mercenaries for Ghaddafi. This actually started initially. The first stories that came out of African mercenaries were wrong, that was an excuse used by these rebels to target blacks and kill them.

African governments have been evacuating their citizens (which never happens, cus the immigrants never want to leave), but most of them are leaving Libya, because they are being targeted by the rebels.

Obama is the most stupid man I have ever seen. I was born in Nigeria, and I used to belong to a Nigerian website here in the US, and they recently banned me, because they hated that I was against Obama. Since this whole thing started, they have been sending me emails begging me to come back, and that i was right.

This is now the universal feeling you get from Africans. Obama doesn’t know what he is doing, and this won’t end well for him.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: Now, the president’s arrogance was on full display last night as he attempted to defend his decision to go to war in Libya. Now, the not so presidential address sounded more like a victory lap than anything else.

Now, amid all of his soaring rhetoric, President Obama credited himself with stopping Qaddafi’s army and preventing a massacre. But as insulting as all of that sounds, we are learning that an administration official is actually attempting to credit President Obama with igniting the Libyan uprising in the first place.

Now, in a speech on Monday, controversial White House aide Samantha Power told a crowd at Columbia University that — quote — “the president has argued our interests and our values cannot be separated… these values have caused the people of Libya to risk their lives on the street.” Of course, this is not the first time Power’s ridiculous comments have made headlines. One of her claims to fame is that she referred to Hillary Clinton as a — quote –“monster” at the height of the 2008 presidential campaign
(more….)

Gadafi needs to go but we’re not doing anything about it unless we do. We’re not arming the rebels unless we do, but we might kill them as well if we decide they’re bad guys. As a matter of fact, we don’t know who the hell these guys are or why we’re supporting them. But we do know that Gadafi is worse, we think. But we’re steadfast in our commitment to…something.

Well, let me see. We “removed” Mubarak, and that looks like a giant clusterf..k so now lets remove Daffy. I’m sure that is going to go equally as well because the “rebels”all love rainbows and unicorns…